Eagle

After the second time my rear brakes blew out, I replaced the entire hard line all the way from the front distribution block (combo valve, which isn't really a combo valve in an MJ) to the rear flex hose. The brake warning light was on when I finished and all the bleeeding in the world wouldn't make it go off -- which had never happened before. Finally, one day with the engine OFF, so I had no vacuum assist, I just stomped on the brake peddle as hard as I could. When I started it up, the brake light was off.

Any chance you could snap a few pictures while it's all opened up to show people how to replace bearings "on-the-fly"? Are you doing all the bearings (rods and mains) or just the mains?

The steering components will certainly work. You might have to transfer some switches and/or wiring over from your 86 column but those two years were both firmly AMC vehicles. I think there's a good chance the 87 column may just drop right in.

You can do the same thing with Marvel Mystery Oil, Seafoam, or a product GM dealers (used to) sell under the clever name of "Top Engine Cleaner." Don't do any of those in your driveway if you live in a compact subdivision or neighborhood. It's mind-boggling just how MUCH smoke a little bit of Marvel Mystery Oil can create.

Many years ago I had an old 6-cylinder AMC that had sat for too long and the rings seized to the cylinder walls. I needed to get it on the road and I had no money. I popped off the head, used a ridge reamer to cut the carbon ring off the tops of the bores, tapped the pistons with a wooden block to free them up, and then ran each piston all the way down in the bore and honed the cylinders with the pistons in place. Then I put on a new head gasket and buttoned it up. It ran fine. Was it the "right" way to do it? Heck no, but it was an expedient way to get the thing running. The car wasn't worth what it would have cost to put in even a junkyard engine, so this was worth a try. New pistons are certainly the "right" way to go with an old engine, but I have rebuild a couple just honing the bores and putting new rings on the original pistons. If the engine has only 62,000 miles on it, the bores shouldn't be badly out of round so, unless one of them is too deeply scored to hone out, a "quicky" rebuild with just new rings and bearings should do the job for you.

Your problem is in confusing optimum operating range with "power." The actual torque and horsepower ratings for the Renix and HO engines are very close, but the Renix has a torque peak around 2200 RPM and the HO has a torque peak around 4,000 RPM. The Renix is a true Jeep engine, intended to produce good usable torque at low RPM for off-road applications. If you try to drive it like a passenger car engine on the street, winding it out to 4,000 or 5,000 RPM before shifting, you're only fooling yourself. The optimum shift point for a Renix is around 2500 RPM, but most people don't believe that because they think revving up to higher RPM "should" produce better performance. If you wish to turn a Renix 4.0L into a passenger car engine, you need to port and polish the head, install larger valves, install a true header, replace the camshaft with one that has a higher torque peak, and install larger injectors. You'll end up with an engine that feels stronger above 3,500 RPM, has lousy low-end torque, and gets crappy gas mileage. Personally, I prefer the Renix. I have an 88 (Renix) and a 2000 (post-HO) XJ, both 5-speeds. On the normal route to work, there are two stretches with 30 or 35 MPH speed limits. In the 88 I can motor along both in 4th gear with no problem. In the 2000, I have to be in 3rd gear for those stretches.

I sympathize. Been there, done that ... I probably even have the tee shirt somewhere. A word of caution ... before you put ANY money into the Hondas, find one of the same year and model, rent it, borrow it, steal it ... do whatever you have to do, but get in one and make about a 2-hour drive. I say this because my back was crunched in a car accident when I was 14 years old and I have had recurring issues ever since. And I will say straight out, that without ANY doubt whatsoever, Honda (and Acura) seats are absolutely the WORST possible seats in the known universe for someone with a bad back. And I say that as a Honda lover. I think the cars are great (I've owned two) and I think the motorcycles are great (owned two of those, also), but the seats in the cars are instruments of torture, pure and simple.

All I see is a white rim. I can't see what the wheel web design is. Are they the spoked style? 6-spoke or 8-spoke? Do the center caps have a chrome(like) outer rim, or are they all black? Your front rims were definitely not S-10 rims, because they aren't on the same bolt circle.

Wasn't that carb computer controlled (partially)? I know it was a horrendous POS. One of my friends in NAXJA had an 86 2.8L. I pulled the carb of a parts XJ I had here and took it to "Mr. Carburetor," who is locally reputed to be an absolute genius with automotive fuel systems. He confirmed it-s a pile of excrement, did a budget rebuild on it, and it got the truck running. Which was all that was called for. I would start looking for a different carburetor. Anything that's old, mechanical, and reliable, like maybe a Holley 2-bbl around a 350 or 400 CFM range.

What style of Jeep rims are on the other three corners? I should be able to send a rim to SC for less than the $25 your yard charged you. That's a rip-off for a used steel rim, BTW.

It may boost your horsepower but I'd bet the ranch you won't like what it does to your torque.

This is what I picked up Yeah, that's EXACTLY what I was warning you about. The center hole on the wheel is smaller than the center of the hub, so the "wheel mating surface" on the wheel is not seating against the flange of the hub. If you drive it like that, you will have exactly the same problem you had before. Either grind out that center hole or (preferebly) find a Jeep wheel.

Just got a Ford style rim that fit for $25 :D . Just gotta find a full matching set now. Any ideas that are within reason for me? The backspacing on Ford rims is different. Don't buy any more unless you're sure that's what you want. Used steel Jeep rims are cheap -- if you were closer, I've got a yard full of them, looking for homes. Also, if your Ford rim is from a Ranger, look at it very carefully. I think Ranger rims have a smaller center hole than Jeep rims. If that's correct, your new rim probably isn't fully seated on the hub and you're on your way to an instant replay of what happened before.

You can't run what you're proposing. Do the math. Stock backspacing is 5.25". Rims are 7" and on OEM rims a 30x9.50 rubs on the lower control arms. With 15x8s, you will move the centerline of the RIM outboard by 1/2" due to the extra inch of rim width, and another 1/2" due to the reduced backspacing. The tire you want to run is 3" wider than a 30x9.50 ... which means 1.5" wider to each side of the rim. Your choice moved everything out 1" and added 1-1/2" on the inboard side. It'll rub worse than the 30x9.50s on stock rims. You need to get down to around 4" of backspacing.

Problem solved. She wanted a high school diploma. Six years in the slammer should be plenty of time to get her G.E.D.

No. Not on the old ones. Neutral on the transfer case disengages the transmission from the transfer case, but it locks the front and rear drive shafts. If they try to tow it like that with the front wheels on the arms and the rear wheels on the ground -- it'll get interesting in a hurry. For a short tow leave it in 2WD. For a long tow, have them use a flatbed. slightly offtopic, I did a flat-drag with my newest MJ in T-case-Neutral and the trans in park, should I be lookin' for aother AW-4 or am I still cool? No weird noises during the tow? I have an 89 and thats how the FSM and the owners manual say to do it. Tranfer case in neutral and tranny in park That is correct -- for a flat tow with all four wheels on the ground. That is not correct for a tow on a hook.

A high-pinion D30 from a '92 or newer Cherokee with ABS (to get the larger u-joints). Don't go newer than 1999 -- in 2000 they changed to a low-pinion front axle. However, that'll get you the crappy composite brake rotors that warp if you look at 'em cross-eyed. I'd keep what you have and just shim the disconnect to make it full-time.

nope. np207 t-case, if it's selec-trac it's a np228 or np229. the np231 t-case was introduced on cherokees later on, either at the very end of the comanche run or directly afterward. The NP231 was introduced during the 1987 model year. And the OP's signature line specifically says he has a 231. Even if he's replacing a 207, a 21-spline 231 is a bolt-in conversion.

Not with Jeep parts. Pete has reported that the Dodge Dakota 4-cyl pickups used the 2.5L Jeep engine mated to an AX-15 tranny, so you could use that bellhousing if you can find one.

I think that's correct. To be honest, it never occurred to me that anyone would consider a Trac-Lok for serious wheeling. They are intended for street and light, occasional wheeling only.

Okay. I guess you're saying that 150,000 miles is premature, and I should have gotten another 100,000 out of my first one. Whatever.

How can that possibly kill a clutch-pack LSD? With virtually no traction, the clutches aren't subject to enough torque to unlock and the axle acts just like a spool. There's no clutch wear at all. The original Trac-Lok in my '88 XJ lasted about 150,000 miles.

A metric ton (or "tonne," more correctly) is 1000 kilograms. One pound equals 2.2 kilograms, so a metric ton is 2,200 pounds. That makes an MJ with the metric tonne ("Big Ton") package technically a 1-ton pickup. Hard to believe, isn't it? No other compact pickup has ever come close to that.

The actuating rods just snap onto the handle mechanism. You'll see how it works when you start working on it. Lift the handle and look inside the tailgate.

So it seems more unsafe on the streets but what about when wheeling in snow? Help/Hurt? Thanks for the quick response Pete! Pete did not say it was "unsafe" to drive with a locker in snow. He said you may have to adjust your driving habits. I have lived in New England all my life. My first car with a posi rear was bought in 1965. Prior to that, I had encountered a couple of situations when I just could NOT make it home in snow storms. Since then, I only drive cars and MJs with limited slips (which might as well be lockers in snow and ice). Haven't encountered a single instance when I couldn't make it through. I have also, since 1965, had two separate instances (in two separate, front-wheel drive company cars) when I was hopelessly stuck and had to be towed out in one case, dug out with a payloader in the other. Those would not have been problems if I had even rear-wheel drive and a lxcoker, and especially in a 4WD Jeep with a locker or limited slip. My MJ that sees regular use has a TrueTrac limited slip in it. I have NO problems in snow and on ice. I also virtually never have to use 4WD. If I didn't have the limited slip, I'd be in 4WD most of the winter. The stories about how "dangerous" lockers are in snow are old wives' tales. Bottom line -- it makes the difference between getting home in a snow storm, or sitting on the side of the road at the bottom of a hill wishing you had installed one last summer when you were thinking about it.